- From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 15:19:43 +0100
- To: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
- Cc: www-svg@w3.org
* Robin Berjon wrote: >In the meantime we reached agreement on a lesser evil that, while it >is perhaps not perfect, is in my opinion satisfactory as a transition >approach. It is perhaps best expressed using the RelaxNG to which it >corresponds: > > <choice> > <group> > <attribute name='xml:id'> > <ref name='ID.datatype'/> > </attribute> > <optional> > <attribute name='id'> > <ref name='NCName'/> > </attribute> > </optional> > </group> > <optional> > <attribute name='id'> > <ref name='ID.datatype'/> > </attribute> > </optional> > </choice> > >Basically, at the formal validation level (and keeping in mind that >there is no DTD in SVG Tiny 1.2) whenever there is an xml:id >attribute, the id attribute is not of type ID. Otherwise, it is. > >This has minor issues, but ones that I think we can (and should) live >with. It does not cause xml:id errors. It doesn't break existing >content since SVG viewers recognise the id attribute anyway. > >What do you think? I might be willing to accept this if there are appropriate tests for this in the test suite along with a CR exit criterion that all the implementations cited in the implementation report pass those tests. I'd rather wait for the XML Core Working Group's final decision on this matter though. >"when both 'id' and 'xml:id' are specified on the same element but >with different values, the SVGElement::id field must return either of >the values but should give precedence to the 'xml:id' attribute." This part seems acceptable, thanks. -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Weinh. Str. 22 · Telefon: +49(0)621/4309674 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de 68309 Mannheim · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/
Received on Friday, 10 March 2006 14:18:25 UTC